In a rare and significant legal move, French President Emmanuel Macron and First Lady Brigitte Macron are preparing to submit what their lawyer describes as "photographic and scientific evidence" to a US court to prove that Brigitte Macron is a woman. This extraordinary step is part of a defamation lawsuit filed against American political commentator Candace Owens and her business, which has repeatedly and publicly promoted the unfounded claim that the First Lady was born male. The lawsuit, filed in a Delaware court, marks an escalation of a long standing battle against a pervasive conspiracy theory that has spread globally, causing significant distress to the presidential couple. The decision to take the fight to a US court is a direct response to Owens's claims, which the Macrons argue were part of a "campaign of global humiliation."
The core of the legal case centers on a viral conspiracy theory that claims Brigitte Macron's birth name was Jean Michel Trogneux, a name that actually belongs to her older brother. Owens, a conservative influencer, has repeatedly amplified these claims on her podcast and social media, even stating in a widely circulated post that she would "stake [her] entire professional reputation on the fact that Brigitte Macron is in fact a man." The Macrons' legal team, from the firm Clare Locke, has stated that they will present evidence in court that will be "scientific in nature," without specifying the exact form this will take. They also confirmed that they will present photos of Brigitte Macron pregnant and raising her three children from her first marriage, providing irrefutable proof of her biological sex.
The Macrons' lawyer, Tom Clare, revealed in an interview that the First Lady found the allegations "incredibly upsetting" and that the constant spread of the disinformation has become a "distraction" for the French president. The couple's decision to pursue the matter in a foreign court follows a similar but ultimately unsuccessful legal battle in France, where a defamation ruling in their favor was recently overturned on appeal. By bringing the lawsuit to the US, the Macrons are targeting the source of a significant portion of the misinformation's global reach and are hoping to hold Owens accountable for what they describe as "relentless bullying." This legal action has ignited a global debate about the limits of free speech, the spread of online disinformation, and the legal recourse available to public figures in the face of widespread and malicious falsehoods.
The case also brings to light the emotional and personal toll of such a campaign of defamation. While the Macrons are prominent public figures, their lawyer emphasized that they are also human beings deeply affected by the accusations. Their willingness to subject themselves to a public trial to "set the record straight" demonstrates the severity with which they view the situation and their resolve to end the campaign of lies. This legal action could set a precedent for how public figures combat disinformation campaigns across international borders, especially when a lack of legal standing in one country may be remedied in another.
